academic women for justic

Academic Women for Justice
Femmes universitaires pour la justice

Political Action, Advocacy and Strategy Assistance for Academic Women


Equity Cases

Academic Women for Justice/Femmes universitaires pour la justice will be providing up-to-date information on cases currently before Tribunals in Canada as well as references to decisions made on Human Rights cases involving women at universities across Canada. By bringing this information together, our goal is to analyse and assess the factors that assist or hinder women and other equity-seeking groups in obtaining helpful outcomes at Human Rights Tribunals and to use and communicate this expertise to affect positive change for women and members of other equity-seeking groups.

Initial analysis suggests that Faculty Associations and Unions not only do not support these actions by women, but often apply for intervenor status (which they are usually always granted) in order to protect their own priorities at the expense of women's chances for obtaining a positive decision. Preliminary analysis also suggests that Tribunals do not fully understand the particular nature, organization and evaluation of academic work and that this impacts negatively on decisions with respect to women's complaints.

Academic Women for Justice/Femmes universitaires pour la justice is committed to communicating its expertise to women and members of other equity-seeking groups who are considering bringing a complaint to a Human Rights Tribunal in Canada. We will also apply for intervenor status with the aim of building awareness at Tribunals about the particular context of academic work, the systemic hurdles that women and members of other equity-seeking groups face in this environment, and any other factors that should be understood to meaningfully evaluate their cases.

Causes devant les tribunaux

Le site de Femmes universitaires pour la justice/Academic Women for Justice affichera les dernières nouvelles sur les causes de femmes universitaires présentement devant les tribunaux des droits de la personne à travers le Canada. Nous publierons aussi les décisions déjà rendues par les tribunaux dans le cadre de plaintes de discrimination de la part de femmes. Notre but, en regroupant ces données, est de mieux comprendre ce qui peut aider les femmes et d’autres groupes qui luttent pour l’égalité, ou inversement ce qui peut leur nuire, devant les tribunaux. Il s’agit de constituer une expertise qui pourra servir à effectuer des changements positifs pour toute personne qui lutte pour l’équité.

D’après notre analyse initiale, il semble non seulement que nos associations et nos syndicats ne nous appuient pas dans nos démarches auprès des tribunaux mais qu’ils cherchent au contraire à obtenir le statut d’intervenant (ce qui leur est presque toujours accordé) afin de protéger leurs propres priorités même au risque de nuire à nos chances d’obtenir justice. Il ressort aussi de cette analyse que les tribunaux ne semblent pas bien comprendre la nature particulière du travail universitaire et ses modes d’organisation et d’évaluation et que cela a un effet négatif sur leurs décisions dans le cadre de nos plaintes.

Femmes universitaires pour la justice/Academic Women for Justice tient à communiquer son expertise aux femmes et aux autres groupes luttant pour l’égalité qui envisagent de faire déposer une plainte à un tribunal des droits de la personne au Canada. Nous cherchons aussi à obtenir le statut d’intervenante en vue de mieux sensibiliser les tribunaux quant au contexte particulier du travail universitaire, aux obstacles systémiques auxquels font face les femmes et d’autres groupes qui luttent pour l’égalité ainsi qu’à tout autre facteur qu’il importe de comprendre pour bien juger de leurs plaintes.


Galina Okouneva vs. Ryerson University

HRT Interim Decision: Galina Okouneva v. Ryerson University, September 11, 2012

HRT Interim Decision: Galina Okouneva v. Ryerson University, June 15, 2012  


Adele Mercier vs. Queen's University

HRT Interim Decision: Adele Mercier vs. Queen's University, September 14, 2012

HRT Interim Decision: Adele Mercier vs. Queen's University, August 21, 2012

HRT Interim Decision: Adele Mercier vs. Queen's University, June 9, 2011

HRT Interim Decision: Adele Mercier vs. Queen's University, May 27, 2011

Interim Decision: March 10, 2011


Emily Carasco vs. The University of Windsor

HRT Final Decision: Emily Carasco vs. University of Windsor and Richard Moon, September 10, 2012

HRT Interim Decision: Emily Carasco vs. University of Windsor and Richard Moon, July 25, 2012

HRT Interim Decision: Emily Carasco vs. University of Windsor and Richard Moon, June 20, 2012

HRT Interim Decision: Emily Carasco vs. University of Windsor and Richard Moon, April 23, 2012

HRT Interim Decision: Emily Carasco vs. University of Windsor and Richard Moon, January 26, 2012

HRT Interim Decision: Emily Carasco vs. University of Windsor and Richard Moon, October 26, 2011

Academic Women for Justice applies for Intervenor Status

HRT Interim Decision on Intervenor Status: Emily Carasco vs. University of Windsor and Richard Moon, March 31, 2011

HRT Interim Decision: Emily Carasco vs. University of Windsor and Richard Moon, October 15, 2010

HRT Interim Decision: Emily Carasco vs. University of Windsor and Richard Moon, September 27, 2010

Windsor law dean candidate alleges racism by Joseph Brean, National Post - Friday, Sept. 10, 2010

"University's response brutal" by Leigh West, Windsor Star November 20, 2010


Dianne Ford vs. Nipissing University

HRT Final Decision Dianne Ford vs Nipissing University,: January 28, 2011


Jennifer Chan vs. The University of British Columbia

HRT Interim Decision Jennifer Chan v The University of British Columbia, January 23, 2012

Professor files complaint against UBC for 'racial bias' by Mark Hume, Globe and Mail, April 19, 2011

HRT Interim Decision: December 21, 2010


Anne Marie Miraglia vs. University of Waterloo

In 2008, Professor Anne Marie Miraglia filed a complaint against the University of Waterloo with the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal, alleging that she had been the victim of sexual discrimination in the process leading to her promotion to full professor, on the grounds, among others, that she was asked to wait a year while the file of a more junior, and less qualified male colleague was put forward for promotion to full professor, that she was subjected to harassment by the Department Chair, following her request for promotion, and that the Department Chair and the Dean, Ken Coates intervened in a discriminatory manner in the promotion process. The Ontario Human Rights Tribunal issued an interim decision on the obligation of the University of Waterloo to disclose pertinent documentation. HRT-Interim Decision Disclosure - October 29, 2009

In July 2010, the Tribunal announced a negative decision, affirming that the differential treatment given Professor Miraglia was not discriminatory under the Code. Final Decision Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario - July 5, 2010

In August 2010, Professor Miraglia filed a request for reconsideration, pointing out substantial failings on the part of the Tribunal during the hearing process and numerous errors in fact in how her case was represented in the Tribunal decision. Request for Reconsideration-RD

On November 17, 2010, the HRT Vice-Chair did not find "compelling and extraordinary circumstances that require the Decision to be reconsidered". Final Decision.


HRT Decision: August 15, 2005 -- Women 2000 vs. the University of Saskatchewan


Dr. Susan J. Hemmings versus University of Saskatchewan

HRT Decision 2: July 30, 2002

HRT Decision 1: May 23, 2001